And lo and behold, we suddenly got inquiries from a whole bunch of cool women excited to discover that we exist and eager to join us at our next event. We couldn’t be more pleased. The word is spreading! And we can wait to meet our newest members.

Reminder: If you’re reading this and think you might enjoy taking part, drop us a note at toplesspulpfiction[AT]gmail[DOT]com. The summer is coming (slowly, but it’s coming). Wouldn’t you like to feel the warm sun and cool breeze on your breasts rather than an underwire or too-tight sports bra…?

You’re really bus y this days. I’m glad to see almost a daily post by you. But as I comment you on Twitter early: You’re breaking barriers appearing topless on a wide followed e-newspaper. Maybe you will appear next on NY Times!

The HuffPost says your mission is to “make reading sexy” – implying that mission statement is from you. I think that sends entirely the wrong message. It reinforces the notion that female topfreedom is for sexual titilation and that only “sexy” women should bother going topless. I see all the photos in the article are of young, thin women. Further pushing the notion that only the “good looking” need participate.

“Making reading sexy” was our blog’s original slogan; we’ve since changed it, and we’ll surely change it again in the future from time to time, but not because we’ve repudiated it. We still feel that “sexy” is a fine thing to be and nothing to be ashamed of. Any woman can be sexy, no matter who she is or what she looks like. It’s not a necessary goal or the only good one, but it’s a perfectly fine one, and no one should be shamed for having it as a goal. (Just as no one should be shamed for not having it as a goal.) We have members of all body types and sizes, and we welcome as diverse a crew as cares to join us. Men who are shirtless can be sexy; so can women. That doesn’t mean shirtlessness (or other nudity) is inherently sexual. But denying that sex appeal exists, or that it can be nice to feel sexy, is silly.

Utterly clueless cowards. Give the would-be puritans back the soap-box they tricked you into using, & stand up bare & proud for nude rights… ONLY! Further, keep your noses out of what people choose to do with such should-be freedom!

You’ve allowed yourselves to be so intimidated by PC witchhunters that you’ve become downright sycophantic. Neutered, asexual nudity may as well be clothed! Achieving nudity rights via kowtowing to prudish self-interest–even assuming such would be possible, which it’s not!–would be textbook hollow victory.

One word, “sexy”, & suddenly you dismiss OCTPFAS entire effort!?… not only prude-pandering but profoundly stupid! If you took the time to really check them out, peruse the blog, actually READ what they have to say, you’d realize they’re some of the best allies the movement could possibly have!… seriously!, it’s utterly impossible that whomever wrote the above libel could possibly have actually read the OCTPFAS blog where many, many posts have stated the exact opposite of that which they’re being falsely accused. Try actually reading about their positive interactions with both supporters & detractors… try actually reading the casual, positive ‘philosophy’ expounded there… or is it too much to ask that you actually know some truth about that which you would so callously trash?

OCTPFAS do not, “get together specifically to feel ‘sexy'”, & this is a downright lie: “These women get off on showing them (women’s breasts)” These women are neither out there having nor advocating for (topless, public) sex; if–IF–any of them, “feel women’s breasts are sexy and [people] like looking at them” &or if–IF–there’s any “exhibitionism”-for-exhibitionism’s-sake-alone going on, then, again, it’s purely incidental… they’re on our side!, they’re actually out there!, doing something for the cause!, effectively!… & all you can bother to do is flame them like some pathetic troll!?

You’ve lost sight of the goal: ‘universal acceptance of nudity/naturism’. Sexuality is incidental! Where consenting people wish to ALSO have sexuality with nudity (which, BTW, is NOT OCTPFAS’ ‘thing’!), that’s THEIR business, NOT YOURS. Similarly, where a democratic consensus of persons wish to NOT mix sexuality with nudity is ALSO NOT your business!

Sadly, you’re behaving exactly as the religious right-wingnuts are in attempting to block gay marriage… other people’s romance & sex lives are NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS!… just as whether-or-not free people wish to mix sexuality with nudity is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!

“There is nothing further from naturism than that.”???… WRONG!… the furthest from naturism/nudism is prude-pandering, PC-nazi, ignorant, self-destructive, insular, intolerant, blinkered ranting such as the above…

Appreciate your leaping to our defense, but really there’s no need for such heated vitriol on either side (from them or from you). Yes, a topless or naked woman can sometimes feel or be sexy, and that’s a natural and inoffensive thing, not something to run away from or feel ashamed of; a shirtless man can, too, in exactly the same ways, to exactly the same extent, and for exactly the same reasons. A man’s neck or arms or calves or lips can be sexy; so can a woman’s. We don’t require either gender to cover those body parts. Baring one’s chest isn’t inherently a sexual act and when we do it during our events it’s generally just for comfort and the pleasant physical sensation (just as it presumably is for the hundreds of men doing it around us in the park), but that doesn’t mean that the sight isn’t sometimes appealing or sexy, in both the men’s cases and in ours. Yes, our goal is for a woman’s being bare-chested to excite no more comment or reaction or social condemnation than a man’s. But both women and men can enjoy feeling sexy dressed in a given outfit (including one that covers them from neck to ankle), and there’s no reason they can’t both enjoy feeling sexy when wearing less as well. We’re all human beings. We all have bodies. Sometimes we feel sexy, naked or clothed. There’s nothing wrong with that.

Oyster mag? Nothing to do with Oyster cards that we have in London- the only women to ever appear on an Oyster card in London are Her Majesty the Queen and the Duchess of Cambridge. Though Catherine in private does appear comfortable sitting in the sun as you do in the park.

Say, are you ladies on Goodreads.com? I don’t know their policy on nudity, and they’ve been criticized since being bought by Amazon, but I still think book-based social networking is great. You could post and rate what you’re currently reading, do the occasional review… It could compliment this blog well.

There’s nothing wrong with masturbation; nothing wrong with giving yourself pleasure. We all do it. What’s wrong is someone attempting to assert dominance over someone else and make her feel degraded, using sex as a tool to accomplish that. That’s what you’re doing, not by masturbating but by posting this message, solely intended to make us feel bad.

Well, the laugh’s on you. We don’t feel bad at all, and you look like a fucking idiot.

People periodically ask this, and then someone always figures it out and answers, but I can’t for the life of me remember what the answer is. If you go back through past blog posts, you’ll find it. (Yes, we could ask her the next time we see her, but somehow we never remember…)